Awesome sharks teeth on Russian Sub [1200 x 1851]

Does that have actually any affect exactly how peaceful it's? In cooler waters it tends to chatter a little. The Sierra-class appears weird, do you understand why? Could you be much more certain? ...

This image with the title of "Awesome sharks teeth on Russian Sub [1200 x 1851]" is one of a large collection of pictures from the category Warship . We collect quality images, from a social network website

Source: To view the original source also read the full comments of the original poster as well as from other redditor, you can click on the following Link.

Some random comments on reddit about Awesome sharks teeth on Russian Sub [1200 x 1851]

  • Does that have any impact on how quiet it is?
  • In colder waters it tends to chatter a bit.
  • The Sierra-class seems weird, do you know why?
  • Could you be more specific?
  • Not really, that is the problem. They just seem kinda 'meh' when compared to contemporary Soviet submarines. The Alfa-class was absurdly fast, manoeuvrable, and automated. The Oscar-class was loaded to the brim with the most modern AShM of the time. The Akula-class was a giant leap forward in terms of stealth. And the Sierra-class? I have never heard anything particularly interesting about it.
  • I see what you're saying. The Sierra class was indeed a big step forward, but it got overshadowed by the Akulas. The Sierras were the first 3rd generation Soviet SSN, and with that came new features. The titanium hull and extensive automation were carried over from the Alfas, and the large torpedo load (~40 weapons) and 8 tubes constituted the largest offensive armament of any submarine at that time. The Typhoon class introduced the OK-650 reactor (the first Soviet reactor to have natural circulation, essential for submarine quieting), but the Sierra I was the first to use it in an SSN hull. The problem was that, being made of titanium, the Sierras were only being built at Gor'kiy, which had a displacement limit of around 9,000 tons. The Soviets wanted to make many more Sierra-like submarines, so the Malakhit design bureau developed the Akula class in parallel. With a steel hull, they could be made more easily, quickly and in shipyards with no displacement limitations. Thus the Akulas ended up being up to 5,000 tons larger than the Sierras. The added displacement likely helped with quieting and the installation of the MGK-540 sonar (vs the MGK-503 MGK-500 carried over from the Victor III in the Sierra I), but otherwise the specs were very similar. Edit: Also the fact that there were only four Sierras total: two Pr. 945 and two Pr. 945A.
  • Not to be incredibly pedantic, but the MGK-503 is just a part of the MGK-540 sonar suite, which includes the Pelamida towed array and four flank arrays. The Victor-IIIs (RTM version at least) used the earlier MGK-500 Skat-KS variant (functionally pretty much identical to the one on the Mike and Charlie-II, it seems that only the model number matters). The RTMK version uses the fairly similar Skat-2M. According to, the Sierra-I uses the MGK-500 Skat-KS together with the Pelamida, although these have probably been upgraded along the line. The Sierra-II probably uses the same system as the Akula, as flank arrays can be seen in drydock photos.
  • You are correct. I was doing it from memory and couldn't remember if it was 500 or 503.
  • Cool.
  • The Alfa was an anomaly, an experiment. The Victors were their main fleet SSN. The Sierra was a big expensive leap forward, and the Akula is a production version with improvements. The USN did the same thing, basically, with Seawolf and Virginia.
  • Comparing Seawolf and Virginia is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. They're very, very different boats, with very different purposes.
  • I did not think that the Sierra and Akula were related, are they?
  • Strictly speaking, no. Essentially just two independent design bureaus designing two submarines to meet the same design briefs.
  • Why did that not seemingly with happen with ballistic missile or cruise missile submarines? or even conventional submarines for that matter? Although this does explain why the Sierra gives me a weird vibe.
  • Although the design bureaus were fiercely competitive, the Sierra class is the only example I know of where two design bureaus actually designed and built two classes in parallel. Rubin and Malakhit mainly stuck to SSBN/SSGNs and SSNs, respectively.
  • This is the Sierra I class submarine K-276 Kostroma. It has an interesting history as this submarine was involved in the collision with the USS Baton Rouge, damaging the latters pressure hull and prompting its withdrawal from service when the repair costs were to much with the added costs of refueling the submarine. The Kostroma is still in service, though, and it has a "kill mark" on her sail.
  • Where's the kill mark? That turquoise graphic with a dolphin in it? It's a smaller picture so it's hard to tell.
  • Read more comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *